You can A use steel post conectors,bolt them to the roof framing, roof over them with all needed flashing and hope the roofers did not make one single mistake doing it. B.roof the thing,lay down stringers in the direction of the flow,screw the decking to the stringers fasten the posts to the deck. Or C. remove the gutter and the siding and the trim so you are down to the rim joists.Put on high quality facia. Roof the thing with a torch down modified they will use 4 x 4'' flashing with a drip edge. Back your rail posts with rubber flashing and bolt them to the rim joists thru the facia after counter sinking the bolt holes in the rail posts. Back up the rubber flashing with tightbond const adhesive on the top. Forget the gutter or install it so the drip edge drains into it. I have and never will do A or B now C I have done 50 times or so. J.

My son purchased his home several years ago. At that time, he knew that not having a railing around the flat roofed addition seen in the picture below was both a liability hazard and against code because the door up there allows access to that area. He wasn't concerned because he lived by himself and had no intention of using the area as a deck. Recently though his insurance carrier did an inspection of his property and notified him that he must correct the situation or his coverage would be dropped. There is a rubber type roof on the area and there has been no problems with it. My son would like to avoid compromising the roof with the installation of any posts for the necessary railings. As you can see, there are also gutters in the way of attaching posts on the outer edges if that's even possible Any suggestions how to remediate this problem would be greatly appreciated. Cross posted in the Home Repair forum

Here is what little I know about codes. That deck doesn't fit in NC but we are ocean and the concern is wave action. FL is generally much stricter but the usual place I hear about is Miami Dade. Gulf side is much different. And then you have a barrier island in front of you. We build upper deck on full pilings (12 inch?). The same ones that the house is on which look a little bigger than yours. My concern (what do I know) is the upper deck is currently held up by something like 2x4's. There has to be something more coming right? The best house is a hurricane is a smooth sphere. Don't want anything to catch wind. I would be concerned (again ocean front) that the wind would rip the deck off and act as missiles to the house. That is a concern with any deck of course - but you would want it to be as strong as possible. Code is incredibly regional and I would hope you have confidence in your engineers.

I checked in with a couple of waterproofing specialist subcontractors before finalizing a typical detail for our practice. Our default proposal for guardrail balustrade attachment is fascia mounted. This is also consistent with my recollection of best practices taught in architecture school. While there are certainly special conditions that can modify this advice, the logic is pretty straightforward in most waterproof deck circumstances. 1. A fascia mounted guardrail typically has a larger distance between the bolts that resist overturning. For this reason, the forces on these bolts typically undergo much smaller forces than bolts associated with a floor-mounted installation. 2. Because waterproof decks often have a "drip" at their edge condition; the mounting plate can be substantially sheltered over a long period of time from weathering. When we compare this logic to the floor or "deck"-mounted installation, two things become apparent. 1. The bolts on a floor-mounted installation typically need to be close to the vertical post to avoid being a tripping hazard, which increases the dynamic forces on these attachment points. 2. The upward orientation of a guardrail post could not be worse from an exposure standpoint. The installations are frequently accompanied by standing water where the "wiggling" forces imposed by their use invite water leakage. Both waterproofing contractors I spoke with sounded like this type of poor solution was ruefully a good source of their repair business. Certainly, if posts support a roof at the perimeter of a waterproof deck, surface-mounted guardrails can make sense. The roof's protection aids the waterproof deck, and the posts for the roof can effectively become part of the guardrail assembly and help with its stability. It is worth noting that many homeowners, and even commercial clients, get preliminary pricing for a simple deck and only come by the guardrail cost when required by building codes or provide a builder with more detailed documentation. In my experience, For these reasons, it is a work scope that is often "shoe-horned" into a project budget. It is also the case that, like "options" when buying a car, the options are what cost you. Decking companies and guardrail companies often charge a premium for the guardrail amenity and will provide the deck-mounted option as an "affordable" choice. The fact the guardrail can be mounted to the surface of the area under scrutiny (and not some peripheral fascia board that might not even be in the current scope of work) is often the reason why people jump at this option. It is the most convenient, which is probably the biggest reason I see people do it. I hope this helps.